MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007150203 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22016

Numerical analysis of solutal Marangoni convections in porous media

2014· article· en· W2007150203 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mostafa Alizadeh, Behzad Rostami, Maryam Khosravi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanofluid Flow and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarangoni effectPorous mediumMechanicsConvectionDimensionless quantityMaterials scienceFinite element methodFlow (mathematics)Boundary value problemPorosityThermodynamicsPhysicsMathematicsComposite materialMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The possibility of instability initiation in porous media by Marangoni convection is studied numerically with a special focus on its application in petroleum engineering and enhanced oil recovery (EOR). Both types of micro‐ and macro‐convections are considered. The finite element method is employed to solve the models numerically. The appropriate Marangoni numbers are introduced according to the model after making equations and boundary conditions dimensionless. In order to evaluate micro‐convections in porous media, the Molenkamp model is extended and validation is performed by comparing concentration maps in a special case. For macro‐convections, a specific concentration distribution is imposed on the boundary to simulate similar conditions in EOR. Results showed that micro‐convections are not strong enough to alter the fluid flow in porous media in applicable ranges of Marangoni numbers and porous media properties. On the other hand, for macro‐convection results, fourteen test cases, each with three different porosities, are defined. As a result, the margin of stability is found and it is also shown that the damping forces of porous media delays the onset of convection.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.164 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicNanofluid Flow and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207